Now, there are no amount of pretend stimulus jobs that can hide the fact that the $787 billion “stimulus” plan did nothing but expand government, and, more importantly, failed to live up to the administration’s own promise to keep unemployment no higher than 8 percent.

Factcheck.org — a nonpartisan, nonprofit group, which “aims to reduce the level of deception and confusion in U.S. politics” — touches on just some of the many whoppers in Barack Obama’s speech to Congress last week. My favorite line is: “Obama continued his recent habit of asserting projections as fact” — a tool that was on full display during the recent stimulus fear orgy.

Some more:

He said “we import more oil today than ever before.” That’s untrue. Imports peaked in 2005 and are substantially lower today.

He claimed his mortgage aid plan would help “responsible” buyers but not those who borrowed beyond their means. But even prominent defenders of the program including Fed Chairman Bernanke and FDIC chief Bair concede foolish borrowers will be aided, too.

He said the high cost of health care “causes a bankruptcy in America every 30 seconds.” That’s at least double the true figure.

He flubbed two facts about American history. The U.S. did not invent the automobile, and the transcontinental railroad was not completed until years after the Civil War, not during it.

He claimed that his stimulus plan “prevented the layoffs” of 57 police officers in Minneapolis. In fact, it’s far more complicated than that, and other factors are also helping to save police jobs.

Then there is the economically dubious Obama assertion that, “Over the next two years, this plan will save or create 3.5 million jobs.” Obviously, there will be no quantifiable way to prove or disprove this, so Obama will surely take credit.

THE FACTS: This is a recurrent Obama formulation. But job creation projections are uncertain even in stable times, and some of the economists relied on by Obama in making his forecast acknowledge a great deal of uncertainty in their numbers.

The president’s own economists, in a report prepared last month, stated, “It should be understood that all of the estimates presented in this memo are subject to significant margins of error.”

Beyond that, it’s unlikely the nation will ever know how many jobs are saved as a result of the stimulus. While it’s clear when jobs are abolished, there’s no economic gauge that tracks job preservation. The estimates are based on economic assumptions of how many jobs would be lost without the stimulus.

It’s just too bad that most of the American people will never hear about these flubs and half-truths.

I’ve got to do my part to avert CATASTROPHE! My paycheck each week is going to contain an extra $13! I’ve got to spend it immediately to pitch in!

Wait. Something seems off. If you divide $400 by 52 work weeks, that’s only $7.69. But I thought Obama said – hmmm. Let’s check it again. No. It’s only $7.69 a week. Must’ve been someone else who said the $13 thing. Geithner probably, that moron can’t even figure out his taxes.

Only $7.69? Jeebers! That’s all?

OK. No worries. It’ll still work. It HAS to, or we’ll face CATASTROPHE!

I’ll add a dollar per week to help the multiplier effect!

I’d add more, but I need to make sure I’m hedging in case of job loss. (Right now here in Main-Stream-Media land we start every day by tossing a business card into a fishbowl. A reader chosen from those who read only online who doesn’t have the decency to subscribe to a single paper draws a card from the bowl. Whoever’s card is picked is given 15 minutes to clear out his desk and make tracks.)

But I’ll add a dollar, so that gives me $8.69 to spend EVERY WEEK!

Maybe I should save up a few weeks to score a bigger purchase and create a bigger stimulus effect. No. The logic is I need to be a stimulator, not a hoarder. If I start saving it the credit problem will remain frozen or whatever.

My car’s dirty, so I could start with a car wash. But that’s so old economy, and besides, my car burns gasoline.

I could buy one of those twisty florescent light bulbs! That’s green! I could buy one a week until my whole house – wait. I’ve already outfitted my house with those weird bulbs, like three years ago, and it’ll take four more years before they go out.

Be a stimulator, not a hoarder!

I’ll take a friend to coffee. But no, those super-hyphenated treats are symbols of pre-crises profligacy.

I’ll give the money to charity! But no, the stimulus bill already gives a few hundred million to charity. I don’t want to act redundantly.

I could buy a pair of socks! But I already have plenty of socks.

Why is this turning out to be such a puzzle? Must be all the pressure is trying to avert CATASTROPHE.

But this just feels pathetic: Thinking of plinking down $8.79 for a cheeseburger and fries or a six-pack of beer or half an album on iTunes just doesn’t feel really all that patriotic.

Why do I feel a little played? The president is coming to Denver to sign the $787 billion so-called stimulus bill that none of us really got to read and we’re to think of it as an honor.

As the Politico points out today, the visit is classic, tried-and-true political strategy employed by politicians who are down and not up: Head for the hinterlands and blame the inside-the-beltway so-and-sos.

It’s the Willie Stark treatment – right out of All The King’s Men, only that Obama is too polite to start talking about taking a “meat ax” to the those who questioned whether all this spending might actually work.

Stark is the fictional replica of notorious Louisiana Gov. Huey Long. When faced with a scandal that threatened his governorship, Stark roused throngs of backwoods supporters in just such a way.

“So help me God,” Stark shouts to the bumpkins. “I shall live in your will and your right. And if any man tries to stop me in the fulfilling of that right and that will I’ll break him. … I’ll hit him. I’ll hit him with that meat ax! … Gimme that meat ax!”

Earlier this month Barack Obama claimed, “There is no disagreement that we need action byour government, a recovery plan that will help to jumpstart the economy.”

Today, more than 200 distinguished economists — including three Nobel Laureates James Buchanan, Edward Prescott, and Vernon Smith — signed an open letter opposing the bailout that appears in today’s New York Times called, “With all due respect Mr.President,that is not true.”

Notwithstanding reports that all economists are now Keynesians and that we all support a big increase in the burden of government, we the undersigned do not believe that more government spending is a way to improve economic performance. More government spending by Hoover and Roosevelt did not pull the United States economy out of the Great Depression in the 1930s. More government spending did not solve Japan’s “lost decade” in the 1990s. As such, it is a triumph of hope over experience to believe that more government spending will help the U.S. today. To improve the economy, policymakers should focus on reforms that remove impediments to work, saving, investment and production. Lower tax rates and a reduction in the burden of government are the best ways of using fiscal policy to boost growth.

There is little doubt the so-called stimulus bill will pass in mid February and be immediately signed by Barack Obama. Republicans have neither the stomach, the platform nor the votes to stop it. For their own sake, however, Republicans should make sure their objections are on the record.

Not a single shred of historical or economic proof, after all, leads us to believe this massive expansion of government spending and debt will create a single job tied to genuine economic growth.* In fact, the more we learn about the specifics the uglier it gets.

To start with, The Washington Times reported that many recipients of federal bailout funds are also major political donors.

A Washington Times review of lobbying disclosure reports found that 18 of the top 20 recipients of federal bailout money spent a combined $12.2 million lobbying the White House, the Treasury Department, Congress and federal agencies during the last quarter of 2008.

That’s 18 of the top 20 recipients. Aren’t these the same special interests that Obama was grousing about during the campaign?

Here is David Freddoso at National Review’s Corner, quoting Rep. Eric Cantor (R., Va.) after the President’s meeting with Republicans regarding the “stimulus” plan:

On the provisions of the stimulus package aimed at small business: “There is actually only 2.7 percent of this bill that is aimed at small business tax relief. In fact, for every dollar being aimed at small business in this bill, there are four dollars being spent for new grass in Washington.”

He is there referring to the fact that the bill contains $400 million on upgrades to the Smithsonian, National Mall, and Monuments (including landscaping) and only $41 million in tax relief for small businesses.

So there is $360 billion more available for Washington cosmetics than there is for small business owners across the entire nation.

“How you can spend hundreds of millions of dollars on contraceptives — how does that stimulate the economy,” (John) Boehner questioned to reporters, “You can go through a whole host of issues in this bill that have nothing to do with growing jobs in America.”

Boehner was referencing a provision in the bill that Energy and Commerce marked up on Wednesday- that would now allow 50 states to offer Medicaid family planning service (like contraceptives) with the federal government’s $9-$1 match. Republicans say that whether or not this is good public policy it has nothing to do with an economic stimulus.

At a time we should be pinching pennies on Medicaid – where fraud is rampant – we are , at the same time, extending benefits? Now, I think grass and contraception are both wonderful. But how either of them will stimulate the economy is a mystery. The whole thing is a mystery. An ideologically driven social experiment on a nation in distress.

*Watch the Joint Committee on Taxation’s ranking member Dave Camp (R-MI) ask a congressional about the potential job creation in the Democrats’ stimulus bill. The man could not confirm that the bill would produce a single job.

Joey Bunch has been a reporter for 28 years, including the last 12 at The Denver Post. For various newspapers he has covered the environment, water issues, politics, civil rights, sports and the casino industry.